Last night I had the realisation of the similarity between language and algorithm and that everything in life is a language, and all you have to do is learn the parts - and create your own whole by linking and forming relationships - and that this is what creativity is to me. Qualities derive from such combinations. I can see why people get into math and code as equally I like the the visual representation of fractals and geometries, shapes, building blocks, spheres, patterns, at-ness.
Musically It's why I dig prog rock and phybianet beats, theres a philosophy behind the representation, there's a thought in the aesthetic, in the relationships. Reflection and motifs to make the whole. Gestalt thought. I find when I listen to artists such as Terra Nine, Rhian Sheehan, Ethnogenic, Bluey and Butech it spurs on the type of creative zone I want to be in.
Using a word like 'zone' irritates me because there is a lot of bias towards this 'trippy 'hippy' sterotype. It is a sterotype and one I've seemed to struggle with my whole life. There's a lot of policing that goes on in New Zealand in terms of social and psychological definitions and to me it mainly seems to stem from economic class divisions.
I've been reading up on simulation design lately and a concept that comes up which intrigues me is designing to 'bridge the gap' between the real and the artificial. The drive to make technology more humanistic is not questioned enough, I feel like I'd like to discover the area of research which is critical about such things, mainly so I can put my finger on exactly what it is that makes me squirmy about it all. Some things that come to mind..
-Cycle of technology is perpetuated by myth: the allure of the 'new', 'change' and 'transformation'. The future as 'new'.
-People feel uncomfortable recognizing a history that oscillates.
-Ignoring social context (there IS a digital divide and technology is not culture free)
-'Stories' and the allegorical nature of technology.
-The pace of technology and of course all that stuff about our bodies and minds oooooooohhh. Nothing new here but what is it exactly that gets my gears grinding? Advertising, probably, like always. Sigh.
I think adopting a new vocabulary to framework and talk about tech is important, language is important, times change, as should our language. I like talking about the 'seamless' integration of physical and virtual environments as a 'digital ecosystem' because instantly it implies some sort of ethical and moral responsibility for the digital environment. Complexity science holds that the whole is greater than it's parts, and the notion of self organisation sitting on the edge of chaos is intriguing. Supporting the dynamics of flow within the system should be every designers job, determining that flow whilst supporting it is another thing, and where the real work begins. I do believe that things need to have a certain level of intuition in order to be adoptive, but that the scaffolding should be decreased as people learn. Really, people should be allowed to create their own scaffolding where ever possible.